Jess,
If you go to the NFLCC page you can see topics on these.
http://www.nflcc.org/
My own education has been on the book written by brothers John and Jim Muma on this topic. As you've probably learned that back in "the day" fly rod lures were basically mini versions of more popular lures such as mini spooks, lucky13, and so on. In all likelihood these were thrown on 8 1/2 foot rods requiring 8 weight lines, much like we see used on larger dahlberg and other poppers.

Today Colby Sorrels who authored a book on Langley reels has a good working knowledge on fly rod lures introduced me to the now defunct Mack's Tackle Workshop, a San Antonio based maker of flies and fly rod lures. At the time, this local Texas company employed local women to tie and build these lures. Many of the Mack's poppers were built with Hard bodies (perhaps cork) and deer hair wings which create much surface action when landing on water and performed well in enticing fish. Interestingly, Colby uses modern materials to recreate replicas which fish well on modern equipment and in my opinion would probably perform even better with glass sticks.

Les

Back in the late 1950's, we used a lure called the Quilby minnow. It was deadly for bass. Also, I used a soft rubber molded hellgramite (hook was molded into the lure/fly) which was also effective for bass. And small spoons that were made by soldering a light wt. hook onto a spinner blade, particularly a willow leaf type blade.

Golfswithwolves, thanks. I think you just reasoned out the bottom line: the rise of UL spinning made the fly rod lure obsolete. Around 1960, UL spinning, or spinfishing at all, was still quite new in the US, and early books about it still used the term "threadline," as the earliest spinning lines were fine braid. Monofilament hadn't been perfected yet and spinning gear still wasn't "everyman's" tackle.

Once it was by the late 1960s, I bet you are absolutely right. That spelled the end of the fly rod lure. Come to think of it, I had a few that were my grandfather's. He died about 1967, and when I first used them, it was with a spinning rod, even though I fly fished and knew he had fished them with his fly rods. I did continue to troll little leaf spinners with a fly rod for a few more years, but the spinning rod cast them better, too.

Crank baits use a combination of a diving lip, buoyancy on the top side of the lure body and embedded weight down low to keep the lure from spinning around in a circle, so they wobble from side to side instead. You don't have to make a molded lure. You can snip a body shape out of buoyant closed cell foam with scissors. And then use epoxy or super glue to add a diving bill (snipped from a tomato container from Cosco). And then add weight down low, somehow, someway. Perhaps as a bead. Perhaps as flattened lead glued to the back side of the diving bill. The plastic bill has to be roughed up with sand paper at any glue spots. Else the glue won't hold.







Homemade crank baits can be made light, for use with a fly rod or heavy, for use with standard bass gear. Now that mass produced crank baits cost $5 to $10 a piece you'd think more bass fishermen would make their own. But most don't realize how easy it is. Most assume you have to make a $20,000 dollar mold first.
Ah. I forgot to mention. You need to make the diving bill way too big at first, so you can tune it (one time only) when you get to the water, by trimming it with toe nail clippers. If it swims to the right trim the left side of the bill.

Also, you can poke multiple holes in the diving bill. A hole down low on the bill makes a deeper diver with tight high-frequency wobble. A hole up high on the bill makes a more shallow diver with a wide, slow motion wobble. Weight on the leader is one way to get a slow motion wobbler down deep.

Finally. Here's an assertion I can't prove but I firmly believe in: Soft bodied crank baits work better than molded, hard bodied crank baits. Perhaps this has something to do with the lateral line sense organ. Perhaps fish can distinguish vibrations emanating from a rock hard chunk of plastic as different than a soft, squishy wobbler. The soft ones do seem to work better.

==> a few more <==

I started fly fishing in the mid 60's NJ and two sorts of fly rod lures were still popular: flyrod Flatfish and misc small spinners - some with a streamer or wet fly attached. IMHO, the ultralight spinning outfits that could throw very small lures didn't appear until the 70's when graphite rods and the better Japanese spinning reels took over. Before than we were mostly tossing #2 Mepps and Swiss Swing spinners and Phoebe Minnows with our fiberglass spinning rods and Mitchell reels. One of my buddies swore by a silver flyrod Flatfish with red spots and caught more than his fair share of very large browns. The clip on spinner blades were also very popular since it was easy to pair any fly or streamer. Tiny Hildebrand flicker spinners were also popular and could be used for shad. By the mid 70's the lighter spinning tackle improved and the fly rod lures vanished. It also seemed that spinning fishermen abandoned the wobbling lures and pretty much stuck to metal spoons and spinners. For the last decade though there seems to be a resurgence in using Rapalas and other minnow lures with great success and the fringe is trying jigs large and small, soft plastics, crayfish lures, and all sorts of bass lures. For example, when the dams on the Delaware system overflow and the large browns gorge on alewives one can use any number of bass lures that imitate alewives and catch plenty. Big trout love crayfish and bass and panfish anglers have come up with all sorts of effective crayfish lures.

I used Rocky & Mirrowlure minnows-I think plastic, about 1 to 1.5 inches long - caught a lot of bass for a 12 year old in the early 60's with a 6wt Shakespeare Wonderod.

Welcome to FFR Supgen!

I know exactly what inline spinners you're talking about, but I had no idea they were intended for the fly rod. My father has those and still uses them on occasion to cast them he puts a few split shots above them. I myself never liked the hook arrangement, to many hooks.

In the days of the fly rod River Runt, et.al., 9' 7-wt cane rods were the norm.

I started fly fishing with a 9-wt. Wonderod to throw 1/64-oz. Rooster Tail and Panther-Martin spinners into white bass jumps - they were killer.
They worked equally well on Guadalupe bass.

I have a buddy who still fishes a Pistol Pete frequently, catching large rainbows and catches more warmouth than the rest of us.

Ever since I discovered the existence of fly rod lures, I've been fascinated with the idea. For one, they're just so darn neat, and there a so many varieties! Secondly, I like the idea of exploring a technique that was used by our fathers and grandfather that has been pushed to the side, for whatever reasons, but are still viable!

Here's my small collection of usable lures. I have a few more that are either too old or unusual so live on display in my office.

https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B9a1I2TuPOK4T0ZpVkVyQ01uZDJuQnh0NU50cTlOZlhoYkRj/view?usp=sharing

The lines are pretty blurry indeed.With articulated streamers tied with 100% synthetic materials all the rage.I always have some fur or feather on every fly i fish,personal preference.Are jigs flies?My beloved local fly shop that closed during the recession had cards of little goldfish spoons that he sold regularly.He just kind of shrugged his shoulders as he was a great traditional tyer as well as the latest trends in flies.He claimed to tie 12000 flies a year and an employee who tied close to that.His shop was near some upscale areas and that;s who they catered too but always had time for clueless souls like me.I never really knew who bought the tiny spoons and what they used them for.I too have a bunch of fly rod lures and rubber bugs as well as old wood deer hair type bass bugs.My favorites are pflueger pippns and those little weber beetles made of tin and hair.

I don't find the lines that blurry as to flyfishing, but they are hard to define from a regulatory standpoint. Most regulatory definitions take weight of the "lure" or "fly" into account. Generically, of course, a fly is a "bait" or "lure" at least in one person or another's fishing slang.

Relative to fly fishing, if the "lure" is attached to a fly line whose weight is what is actually cast, it is a fly, the bait/lure going along for the ride. Fly fishing depends upon fly-line casting, and isn't the same as fishing with a fly, or fishing with a fly rod. If the "fly" is heavy enough to be "thrown" by the rod and tow the leader/line along, it is a "lure." As in earlier days of angling, fly rods are primarily used for fly-line casting, but by virtue of their length they can be versatile poles for trolling and/or throwing heavier lures.

I used to cast spoons a lot with a 9wt and they followed the line. A small night crawler with no shot will follow the line if not slung off. An oval cast or even opening up the loop can broaden the use of a flyline, so can an elevated platform like a dock or a bridge.
I say jigs are flies if they can be cast with a fly line, all the currently popular beadhead/conehead/barbell stuff are jigs and every one using them calls them flies.
As to classification I am a flyrod fisherman, mostly I use flies. Although with the recent Mo. definitions I found myself fishing "soft plastic baits" when tying on a foam beetle or gurgler.
Writing regulations that clearly specify what fly fishing or even what a fly is legal terms can be nearly impossible, and that is a fine reason to eliminate "fly only" or "fly fishing only" regulations and areas. I don't feel like I am a threat to the other anglers and I don't feel like I need to be protected from them either.